COA findings sa operasyon ng San Pablo City Shopping Mall: Lugi ang City Government

Ika-Lima na Serye ng Sampung Serye

Ulat pananaw ni Dodie C. Banzuela

The Comprehensive Audit Report on the operations of the San Pablo City Public Market and Shopping Mall

Covering the period January 1997 - 1st Semester of 2001

7. Finding: The adjudication and award of market stalls were not undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the Revenue Code of the City of San Pablo.

The Ordinance 56, otherwise known as the Revenue Code of the City of San Pablo provides the following provisions relative to the adjudication and award of the stall in the public market, to wit:

“Section 6B.08. Vacancy of Stall/Booth and Adjudication to Applicants-

a) Administrative Provisions – Vacant or newly constructed stalls/booths shall be adjudicated to qualified applicants in the following manner:

1. Notice of Vacancy of vacant or newly constructed stalls or booths shall be made for a period of not less than ten (10) days immediately preceding the date fixed for their award to qualified applicants to appraise the public of the fact that such stalls or booths are unoccupied and available for lease. Such notice shall be posted conspicuously on the unoccupied stall or booth and the bulletin board of the market. X x x x . . . .

i) Creation of a Market Committee – There is hereby created a permanent market committee composed of the City Mayor as Chairman, a representative of the Sangguniang Panglunsod, the City Treasurer, the City Assessor, the City Engineer and a representative of the market vendors, as members, whose duties are to conduct the drawing of lots and opening of bids in connection with the adjudication of vacant stalls and to certify the results thereof and to consider proposals of any individual whether natural or juridical, for the construction, maintenance, operation, improvement and development of the public market. (Ordinance No. 1, January 4, 1994).”

Despite those provisions of the Revenue Code of San Pablo City, adjudication and award of the stalls in the market were made without the benefit of the public bidding or drawing of lots as required. Likewise, the market committee was not formalized and functioned as mandated. The committee did not conduct drawing of lots prior to the adjudication and awards of stalls. Notices of vacancy or availability of area intended for the stalls/booths had also not been made to the public; thereby, limiting the information to only few interested parties.

Further, it was also disclosed during the audit that the whole third floor was adjudicated and awarded by the former City Mayor to only two entities – the Richmond Amusement Corporation, represented by its President Carlito C. Go and Mr. Cheung Tin Chee. The awards were done through negotiated contact and without public bidding.

Management Comment

The former City Mayor averred that the operation on the ground floor is distinct and separate from the operations of the second and third floors of the Public Market building; hence, the administrative provisions of Revenue Code of the San Pablo City was rendered inoperative in the adjudication of stalls in the second and third floors. He argued that contrary to the allegation that notice of vacancy and availability of stalls in the second floor had not been made to the public the same is totally unfounded. He insisted that with the posting of Resolution No. 23, series 1996, entitled “Guidelines for the Availment of Stall Rights” prior to its enactment, as required under Section 59 of the RA 7160, is sufficient enough as compliance to the required notice of vacancy to the public.

The allegation that market committee was not formalized and functioning as mandated is specious according to the former City Mayor. He believes that the committee did not conduct drawing of lots and opening of bids in connection with the adjudication of the stalls because there was no vacancy created and that the original stallholders occupying the old market were just given back their previous stall. He further stated that the only function that the market committee ever performed was to monitor, verify and validate the process of stall reinstatement administered by the San Pablo Market Vendor Association.

Team Rejoinder

In the absence of guidelines passed by the Sangguniang Panglunsod relative to the operations of the second and third floors of the market, the provisions of the City Market Code of San Pablo govern the operations of the whole market. The required posting under Section 50 of RA 7160 prior to affectivity of the ordinances and resolutions in different from the requirement of Section 6B.08 (a) 1 of the Revenue Code. The purpose for which it has been posted is giving the constituents the rights to file any motion for its revision, modification or dismissal, if necessary, while the requirement under the Revenue Code is to appraise any interested party to file application and to participate for the scheduled drawing of bids, adjudication and award of stall/booth.

Recommendation

Require Chief Executive and other concerned officials of the City to observed the provisions of Ordinance 56, otherwise known as the Revenue Code of the City of San Pablo, in the adjudication and award of the stalls in the public market.

8. Finding The City Treasurer Office failed to monitor the actual occupancy of the lease resulting to nonpayment of stall rental and to implement administrative or legal sanction for violation of Section IV, XIII and XVII of the contract of lease relative to the uses of the leased stall, transfer of rights and subleasing of the stall in the market.

May Karugtong